Any word or thought on a ride for 2006???

Sorry - couldn't resist that one...

179.44ft/sec * 3600sec/hour * 1mile/5280ft =

122.34 mph.

Yeah, I can see where you get these numbers. I think perhaps drag is almost a non-factor here, and once an initial velocity is added, it would start to make more sense...

...probably would get up there in the 130mph neighborhood...

I wouldn't say drag is a non-factor. He calculated MF at 94mph, it only reaches 92-93 and thats with an initial velocity of 13 mph coming over the lift. I think the friction lost to bearings, wheel on track and air play a pretty big role in determining a coasters true speed.

I think the friction lost to bearings, wheel on track and air play a pretty big role in determining a coasters true speed.

That is very true, but how do you explain the fact that TTD can reach ~120 from (less than) 420 ft? the initial velocity is not that great in most cases. I'm not trying to bash, or be a jack***, just trying to figure this out, cause its buggin me out a bit...

I wouldn't say drag is a non-factor

I said almost a non-factor...

Geez, I introduce a couple paragraphs of practicality into an argument and all hell breaks loose!

Geez, I introduce a couple paragraphs of practicality into an argument and all hell breaks loose!

Yeah...

you

see

what

you've

done?!?

It's all your fault!!!! :)

Has anyone actually clocked TTD on the downside? We all know it hits about 120 on the launch, but is it getting that on the way down?
We assume so, because as it converts KE to PE on the way up must be dispensed on the way down. But how much of that KE is lost to friction on both sides?
It may very well only hit about 105 on the way down. It would be interesting to ping it with a radar gun on just before it hits the brakes to see how fast it is going. Factoring with a fall height of 410 I figured only about a pure 110 mph before all the friction is lost and initial speed is added back in. I doubt it would get much higher than that.

(and you've actually become less of a jack*** than I thought you were this morning, so don't worry about it. Its been a good discussion.)

Well, I was going by the numbers given by CP... they say 120mph from launch and then 120mph (approx) on the way back down...

and, of course, we know CP would never fudge the numbers...

And, it would make sense that it loses 2-10mph due to friction, depending on the weather and all that jazz.

I was also a little confused by their numbers given for Dragster's speed on the downside. A drop of 400 feet gives you ~109 mph, and they approximate that the train crests the tophat at a speed of ~10 mph. So unless they figured out a way to eliminate virtually all of the drag on their trains between MF and Dragster, it would seem that CP is fibbing about hitting 120 mph on the down side of the tower.

Could the themed aerodynamics of the train nose actually help cut through the wind a little better?

Could the themed aerodynamics of the train nose actually help cut through the wind a little better?

Absolutely... any aerodynamic propert helps. Now, it doesn't help too much, considering that there's not much in front of the front row...

What happened to the topic on a new ride for 2006? Everyone's talking about something totally different. Back to the topic now people. No effense to anyone...

The only thing thats kind of not aerodynamic about Dragsters trains are their seats. But I think thats why those holes were put in them. :P
I also think that when people put their hands up, they cause a small amount of wind friction. I bet you could get a rollback if you get everybody in your train to put their hands up.

Oh yeah, back on topic......I want a floorless!!:) *** Edited 8/3/2005 8:58:47 PM UTC by TTD 120mph***

RollerNut said:
What happened to the topic on a new ride for 2006? Everyone's talking about something totally different. Back to the topic now people. No effense to anyone...

There is a great discussion going on and you go and tell us we are off topic. The post you made was "Off topic" and on top of that you added nothing to the conversation that was going on, or the one you said we were "Off topic on".

TTD 120mph said:

I also think that when people put their hands up, they cause a small amount of wind friction. I bet you could get a rollback if you get everybody in your train to put their hands up.

I don't think that could happen with such a small amount of wind friction.

The rollback is probably caused by the train's weight. Ill bet if you have a train of fat people TTD will rollback until it launches at 122-123.If you havent noticed it doesnt always hit 120, just look at the radar gun display.

ttdragster16 said:
Ummm not to get anyones hopes up but i think i seen a footer behind where the swans used to be.

This footer has already been discussed, and its been determined that its probably from the Swan Boats' shed crane. *** Edited 8/3/2005 11:15:48 PM UTC by SFGA=toilet***

Mfs height isn't fudged, didn't a policeman use a radar gun on it?

^Do you mean speed?

If you do, then no it wasn't fudged.

tophat said:

TTD 120mph said:

I also think that when people put their hands up, they cause a small amount of wind friction. I bet you could get a rollback if you get everybody in your train to put their hands up.

I don't think that could happen with such a small amount of wind friction.

I actually forgot to put a :) after that sentence.
See, I heard that from someone but chose not to believe it.

But hey! you never know. Even a small amount of wind drag difference can cause Dragster to rollback. But other factors, like weight or wind, would have to play in it as well.

I bet it would roll back if you got everyone on the train to spread out trash bags in front of themselves

That was only a senseless joke, no one get upset about safety...